DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) vs MiMo-V2.6-Flash
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) by DeepSeek or MiMo-V2.6-Flash by Xiaomi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) scores 1.6 points higher (39.5 vs 37.9) but costs 6.1× as much to run the benchmark ($672 vs $110; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) when you need intelligence above 37.9, and MiMo-V2.6-Flash when 37.9 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) | MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.5 | 37.9 | −4.1% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 4.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $671.96 | $109.55 | −83.7% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 83.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 14.92s | 49.53s | +232.0% MiMo-V2.6-Flash is 232.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.29 / $1.20 | $0.14 / $0.28 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
MiMo-V2.6-Flash vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max): 4.1% less intelligence, 83.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 232.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- MiMo-V2.6-Flash is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Max)MiMo-V2.6-FlashToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash/mimo-v2-6-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash/mimo-v2-6-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill